(July 27, 2017 at 12:19 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(July 27, 2017 at 9:27 am)SteveII Wrote: Go ahead--explain away all the points I made above. Make sure you don't leave any of them out--not explaining even one will knock your house of cards down in an instant.
Until you do, I have a unaddressed body of evidence that BILLIONS (in case you were not clear on the size of the jury) of people have considered and determined that it meets the standard of proof they chose for themselves--whether that be "beyond reasonable doubt", "clear and convincing evidence", "preponderance of the evidence", "substantial evidence", or "some evidence".
Okay, so your position is extraordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence--just ordinary evidence of the components of the claim? Do you think that the NT fails to provide some level of ordinary evidence (even if you think that it does not meet your personal level of proof you require)?
In case you are saying that the supernatural has to be proven before considering the evidence of the NT claims, then that's just question begging.
A large number (maybe close to a billion?) of people also believe the Mandela Effect is caused by a supernatural (or at the very least, natural but without a shred of evidence for it ) event. Does that mean we can reasonably conclude that doppelgänger universes are colliding with our time-space, and changing the spelling of "The Berenstain Bears?"
Well at least you've provided extraordinary evidence.
